By Sam Frescoe
A statement against
the junk that peddlers of dominate culture
want us to swallow with a smile.
want us to swallow with a smile.
Welcome to the next CRAP segment. CRAP is dedicated to
calling-out the junk that politicians and activists within dominate culture
want us to accept with a smile. If you’re ready to resist what is “Coercive,
Reprehensible, Arrogant, Profane” or “Corrupt, Ridiculous, Absurd, Pointless”,
then you’ve arrived in the right place. I am your host, Sam Frescoe. I’m glad
you’re here!
--- WARNING ---
You are about to enter a “feelings
endangerment zone” currently occupied by a liberated, straight, white, God
fearing, gun toting expert marksman; an all American patriot. Be advised, it’s
highly likely that he doesn’t care about your feelings in any way.
--- WARNING ---
Black Lives Matter (BLM)…heard of it! If not, then you’ve been living under a rock. – In an effort to be courteous, let me say the following: I AM NOT A FAN OF BLACK LIVES MATTER. With that bias clearly on display, this post is intended to present a series of questions I’d like to direct to BLM.
Framing
BLM has been present in the
American discourse for some time now: from Ferguson, MO to New York, NY, to
Dallas, TX, points in between, and overseas. During that time I’ve observed the
media associate BLM with loud demonstrations, peaceful marches, violent riots,
and quiet sit-ins. Then, on 8 July 2016, media outlets began holding up BLM as
an ideological justification for the premeditated destruction of human life.
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is
social-political movement with a discernable organizational structure. BLM has
an actual and virtual presence in modern American discourse. A foundational
belief of BLM is that black people experience physical, political, economic,
and social violence sanctioned by the government; black people are powerless to
stand against that violence. BLM intends to execute a type of campaign that
encompasses black persons (and society at large by extension). The campaign is
expected to be radical (outside the norm) in its nature. BLM claims to “affirm”
black lives; not all lives, black lives.
“Racism is a manifestation of equal parts hatred and stupidity.”
CRAP – Coercive, Ridiculous, Arrogant, Profane
In my view, Black Lives Matter, while popular, active, and
appealing, is a dangerous embodiment of hatred and stupidity. BLM is an angry,
virtue signaling, injudicious, racist, sexist, and politically regressive
social-political movement. Their “principled” approach is contradictory and
disingenuous in of itself; and then, their actual guiding principles embrace,
and advocate for, racist, sexist, disruptive, illogical, separatist, and anti-homosexual
attitudes and behaviors. – Now pile on the actual behavior of the BLM activists
and demonstrators themselves.
Shoveling “Ship High In Transit” Material
Of course, because BLM represents a point of view, there is
an “other side” to be understood as well; and, to that end, I have questions.
·
Approaches & Arguments
o
Why should a nation following the lead of three
black females? – Three are activists. Two are writers published with
left-leaning periodicals, actual and virtual. One is a community organizer.
None practice an analytic or empirical profession. None are aligned with the
current norms of government or social institutions.
o
What’s with the emotional character attack? – How
does your message, coupled with your background, develop and protect your
character from the same type of attack?
o
What American rights have not been accorded to
black Americans? – Or, is it easier to answer, “What black rights have not been
enforced on behalf of black people?”
o
Why separate black humanity from humanity in
general? How is this not narcissistic as though black humanity is separate from
all others?
o
Regarding claims of black resiliency. If the
black population is resilient in the presence of lethal tyranny (meaning to
prosper despite an opposing force), then what’s the problem? The population of
blacks in the United States has grown exponentially since 1790.
o
Why would you be so stupid as to affirm Black
contributions to “this society,” (association by paragraph construction) “a
world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for
demise.”?
o
How can an elitist group of black persons be
more intelligent (or morally superior) on matters impacting Black lives than
the throngs on common people living those circumstances daily?
o
Is BLM a pro-black political movement or a
pro-black feminist movement?
·
Racism
o
How does promoting one form of racism make
racism in America better for everyone?
o
Why should I support black persons behaving
violently against non-black persons as evidence of a non-racist attitude?
o
If BLM does not care about Whiteness, then why
should whites care about Blackness?
·
“Freedom and Justice”
o
How is the “freedom and justice” of non-black
persons predicated on the “freedom and justice” of black persons.
o
How was the power to establish “freedom and
justice” for anyone bestowed to BLM?
o
If black “freedom and justice” is adopted, then
what is the remedy available to citizens for settling losses or harms as a
result?
o
How might blacks, or those not black enough,
change their minds if they become the victim of this proposal?
o
Black “freedom and justice” as compared to what?
At what cost? What hard evidence does BLM have?
o
Why should a group of progressive laws
protecting “freedom and justice” (civil rights) be augmented or replaced with
another set of progressive laws protecting black-only “freedom and justice”
(the antithesis of civil rights)?
o
If blacks are willing to dictate “freedom and
justice” to non-blacks, then are blacks willing to have “freedom and justice” dictated
onto themselves?
o
If racist means are used against non-blacks to
obtain black “freedom and justice,” then is it acceptable for racist means to
be used to obtain non-black “freedom and justice”?
·
Justice
o
How was the power to embody and practice justice
bestowed to BLM?
o
If justice is practiced, then who pays the price
for being unjust, and what is that price?
o
If BLM is the keeper of justice, then what is
the remedy available to the citizen for settling losses or harms?
o
If a party in receipt of BLM justice disagrees
so strongly as to resist the decision, then how far is BLM willing to go to see
BLM justice done?
o
How might BLM change its mind if it becomes a
victim of black justice?
o
If BLM is willing to impose justice upon me,
then is BLM willing to accept justice I impose upon it?
o
If you don’t care about my life/liberty/wealth,
then why should I care about your life/liberty/wealth?
o
How was the power to define restorative justice
bestowed to BLM?
o
Restorative Justice: Restorative to what? At
what cost? What hard evidence does BLM have?
o
If BLM restorative justice is established, then
who pays the price for being unjust, and what is that price?
o
If BLM restorative justice is practiced, then
what is the remedy available to the citizen for settling losses or harms?
o
If a party in receipt of BLM restorative justice
disagrees so strongly as to resist the decision, then how far is BLM willing to
go to see BLM restorative justice done?
o
How might BLM change its mind if it becomes a
victim of black restorative justice?
o
If BLM is willing to impose restorative justice
upon me, then is BLM willing to accept restorative justice I impose upon it?
o
Why does BLM embrace illegal activity as a
guiding principle (specifically illegal immigration of black persons)?
·
Hard Work
o
Why did BLM decide that working “doubles” is
without virtue?
o
Why speak to black women exclusively? – What
about black men working “double shifts”? If BLM wants full participation, then
what is BLM doing to make it so “double-shifters” don’t have to work a “double
shift?”
o
How is this statement not true? – Everyone is
responsible for their thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and the circumstances in
which they are found.
·
Sexism
o
Why lie? – It is not possible to have a female
exclusive space free from sexism.
o
Why would BLM intentionally divide its followers
in this way?
o
Why does BLM, a pro-black-family movement, wish
to segregate black women away from black men, thus silencing black men? – What
is fundamentally wrong with black men?
o
If misogyny identifies “prejudice against
women,” then how does segregating women away from men not show prejudice
against women and men simultaneously?
o
If BLM does not care about black men, then why
should black men care about black women?
o
What about building a Black men affirming space?
Why are black men inferior to black women?
o
If you don’t care about my masculinity, then why
should I care about your femininity?
·
Family
o
How is a “black village” better than a
traditional nuclear family?
o
On what grounds does BLM disregard the wisdom of
the past several centuries of having nuclear family structures?
o
Why give an abandonment option to mothers,
parents and children based on their comfort level?
o
If you don’t care about my nuclear family, then
why should I care about Black Village?
o
Should the BLM proposal be enacted and fail,
then who pays the price for that failure (and what is that price)?
o
How might black persons change their minds if they
become the victim of this proposal?
o
Why should any parent be allowed an opportunity
to avoid responsibility for the results of their thoughts, feelings, behaviors,
and surrounding circumstances that resulted in becoming a parent?
o
How will Black Villages promote offspring that
possess increasingly higher intelligence?
·
Attitudes
o
Diversity: How does BLM substantiate their
diversity claim when they are on the record for being exclusively committed to black
persons and black women; and, at the same time, to denying, disrespecting and
lamenting black male authority figures.
o
Black Privilege: How are black folks privileged
in different parts of the world? – And, regardless of the answer, how does that
assessment impact the black situation in the United States?
o
Collective Values: Given the performance of the
black community in the United States at large, how do the following terms NOT
describe your view of collective values: poverty, sexual promiscuity, dropping
out of school, criminal activity, racism, sexism, illogical thought, and anger?
o
Dissent: Why does BLM feel obligated to exclude
all others not aligned with their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors (comrades)?
·
Sex
o
Why does BLM advocate for normalizing gender
dysphoria?
o
How does BLM avoid homosexual-phobia while
making “safe space” for black LGBTQ persons?
·
Rights
o
Why make such a big fuss about being denied
“basic human rights and dignity” without offering a clear definition of basic
human rights and dignity?
o
In your view, what are the basic human rights
and dignity? To whom do they apply? How do they apply? When do they apply? Why
are they important?
For BLM proposals to become reality, the basic arrangements
of the United States must shift from an individualist perspective to a
collectivist perspective; from a republic form of government to a democratic
(mob of the majority) form of government. In other words, make “protected
class” warfare common and acceptable.
Imagine a nation where Beautiful
persons have social privilege because they are Beautiful enough; therefore, it
is legitimate for Ugly persons to oppose, dislike, and loathe Beautiful persons.
Now, Ugly persons can say or do anything that may or does result in a harm, loss,
or tort because Beautiful person privilege brought about Ugly person
oppression. Meaning, Beautiful persons are inherently evil and bad; whereas, Ugly
persons are inherently graceful and good. – But, wait! There are graduations of
Beautiful and Ugly; and, the hatred/stupidity cycle continues.
Going Forward – A Solution
Break the hatred/stupidity cycle.
·
“That Which is Good” vs “That Which is Bad” –
Virtuousness is a human achievement. Viciousness is a human failing. At some
point each person (individual) must choose to identify with
graceful/virtuous/good people (collective) or evil/vicious/bad people
(collective). It’s the difference between “doing what is good” (objective
reality) and “doing what feels good” (subjective reality).
·
Logic Arguments are required. – State the
issue/solution, make claims regarding the issue/solution, support each claim
with hard evidence, and warrant why it’s reasonable to accept the argument or
proposal. – Do not allow deliberate interruptions, discomfort, imagination,
feelings, hyper-criticality, and political associations derail the act of
logical reasoning.
·
Remove government involvement when possible;
otherwise highly restrict government authority to act. – Because governments
have a monopoly of force the use of a government programs should be highly
limited. To do otherwise is not compatible with personal “freedom and liberty.”
This is a two-way street: people must accept personal responsibility for
themselves and those in their charge; and, at the same time, governments must
allow people to fall should they fail to meet their responsibilities.
·
There is no such thing as a Performance
Guarantee – Whenever there is a proposal to change there cannot be a guarantee
that ‘this’ or ‘that’ will happen. Why? Human nature. Individual persons make
logical and illogical choices regardless of the incentives one way or the
other. – A non-redeemable guarantee is worthless.
·
Delegate Solution-Making to at least below the
State-level, if not lower. – Thomas Sowell stated the rationale for this best
when he said, “There is no more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no
price for being wrong.”
·
Default to primacy of the individual. – In the
end, it’s the individual that makes a final decision.
·
Default to primacy of equal opportunity. – Let
individuals choose in favor or against and receive the natural results of that
decision.
Your View
Your thoughts and perspectives are important. I invite you
to tell me what you believe with the comment section below or at samfrescoe@gmail.com. Please check out The Sam
Frescoe Project on Facebook.
